I've already tried depthmask shaders and examined some other ideas, but it seems like it doesn't suit me at all.
I'm making an AR game and I have a scene with a house and trees. All these objects are animated and do something like falling from the sky, but not all at once, but in sequence. For example, the house first, then trees, then fence etc.
(Plz, look at my picture for details) http://f2.s.qip.ru/bVqSAgcy.png
If user moves camera too far, he will see all these objects stucking in the air and waiting for their order to start falling, and it is not good. I want to hide this area from all sides (because in AR camera can move around freely) and make all parts visible only when each will start moving (falling down).
(One more screen) http://f3.s.qip.ru/bVqSAgcz.png
I thought about animation events, but there are too many objects (bricks, for example) and I can't handle all of them manually.
I look forward to your great advice ;)
P.S. Sorry for my bad english.
You can disable their(the objects that are gonna fall) mesh renderers and re active them when they are ready to fall.
See here for more details about mesh renderer.
Deactivate your Object. You might use the camera viewport coordinates to get a y position outside the viewport. They start on the bottom left of the screen (0,0) and go to the top right of the screen (1,1). Convert them to worldspace coordinates. Camera.ViewportToWorldPoint
Vector3 outsideCamera = Camera.main.ViewportToWorldPoint(new Vector3(0.5f, 1.2f, 10.0f));
Now you can use the intended x and z positions of your object. Activate it when you want to drop it.
myObject.transform.position = new Vector3(myObject.transform.position.x, outsideCamera.y, myObject.transform.position.z);
Another thing you could additionally do is scaling the object from very small to its intended size when it is falling. This would prevent the object being visible before falling when the users point the camera upwards.
1- Maybe you can use the Camera far clipping plane property.
Or you can even use 2 Cameras if you need to display let's say the landscape on one (which will not render the house + trees + ...) with a "big" far clipping plane and use a second one with Depth only clear flags rendering only the items (this one can have a smaller far clipping plane from what I understand).
2- Other suggestion I'd give you is adding the scale to your animation:
set the scale to 0 on the beginning of animation
wait for the item to be needed to fall down
set the scale to 1 (with a transition if needed)
make the item fall down
EDIT: the workaround you found is quite just fine too! But tracking only world position should be enough I think (saving a tiny amount of memory).
Hope this helps,
Finally, the solution I chose. I've added this script to each object in composition. It stores object's position (in my case both world and local) at Start() and listening if it changes in Update(). So, if true, stop monitoring and set MeshRenderer in on state.
[RequireComponent(typeof(MeshRenderer))]
public class RenderScript : MonoBehaviour
{
private MeshRenderer mr;
private bool monitoring = true;
private Vector3 posLocal;
private Vector3 posWorld;
// Use this for initialization
void Start()
{
mr = GetComponent<MeshRenderer>();
mr.enabled = false;
posLocal = transform.localPosition;
posWorld = transform.position;
}
// Update is called once per frame
void Update()
{
if (monitoring)
{
if (transform.localPosition != posLocal || transform.position != posWorld)
{
monitoring = false;
mr.enabled = true;
}
}
}
}
Even my funny cheap сhinese smartphone is alive after this, so, I guess, it's OK.
Related
I'm trying to make a 3D compass in unity, like the one in scene mode.
But its not looking to bright.
At the moment
end goal How do I better emulate the scene mode transform compass? and keep the GamObject "3DCompass" always in view? (without putting it under the Main Camera)
//Compass3D
public class Compass3D : MonoBehaviour
{
public Vector3 NorthDir;
public Transform Player; // Camera
public GameObject NorthLayer;
// Update is called once per frame
void Update()
{
ChangeNorthDir();
}
public void ChangeNorthDir()
{
NorthDir.z = Player.eulerAngles.y; //May need to change
NorthLayer.transform.eulerAngles = NorthDir;
}
}
Hm...
Well, firstly, you need to realize that the compass' orientation never changes. That's kind of the point of it. The compass always points the same way, meaning it doesn't rotate.
Meaning there's no need for you to do anything in update, you just set where the north is supposed to point to, and leave it at that. The illusion of it rotating comes from person rotating, while the compass keeps pointing the same (global) direction.
The second thing is a big, lazy, awesome secret I'm going to tell you about:
Quaternion.LookRotation
So what you need to do is just rotate the compass correctly on Start, meaning rotate it so that its "Forward direction" is Vector3.forwards (that's a global Z+), and its upward is Vector3.up (global y+). And then never touch the rotation again.
But you want it to stay in view (without being childed to the camera), so what you'll do in update is that:
public class Compass3D : MonoBehaviour
{
public Vector3 NorthDir;
public Transform Player; // Camera
public Vector3 offsetFromPlayer; //needed to keep position from camera. this basically determines where on screen the compass will be positioned. 0,0,0 would be at the same position as the camera, experiment with other values to find one which positions compass relative to camera in such way that it displays on screen where you want it
public GameObject NorthLayer;
void Start()
{
//northDir can be whatever you want, I'm going to assume you want it to point along Unity's forward axis
NorthDir = Vector3.forward;
//set the compass to point to north (assuming its "N" needle points in the direction of model's forward axis (z+). if not, change the model, or nest it into a gameobject within which you'll rotate the model so that the N points along the parent gameobject's z+ axis
NorthLayer.transform.rotation = Quaternion.LookRotation(NorthDir, Vector3.up);
//nothing else needed, the rotation will be fine forever now. if you want to change it later, just do the above line again, and supply it the new NorthDir
}
// Update is called once per frame
void Update()
{
//only thing you need to do in update, is keep the relative position to camera. tbh, easiest way would be to parent the compass, but you said you don't want that, so...
transform.position = Player.position + (Player.rotation * offsetFromPlayer);
//you need to make sure that the compass' offset from camera rotates with the direction of the camera itself, otherwise when camera rotates, the compass will get out of view. that's what multiplying by Player.rotation is there for. you rotate Vectors by multiplying them with quaternions (which is how we express rotations).
}
}
What this code does: first it sets the compass so it points towards north. And then it never touches that again, because once the compass points towards north, if it's not parented to anything (which I assume it's not), it will keep pointing north. IF it is parented to anything else, just copypaste that line from start to Update too, so that when the orientation of compass' parent changes, the compass fixes its pointing back to global north.
Then, in update, it only updates its position, to keep at the same place relative to camera. The important thing to note is that the position needs to take the camera's direction into account, so that when camera rotates, the compass moves similarly to if you had your hand outstretched in front of you, and you rotated your whole body. If the compass is not parented to anything, that motion the tip of your hand does is still just a position change, but it is position relative to your whole body and its direction, so that position change needs to take that into account.
In this code, if you put the offsetFromPlayer as Vector3(0,0,1), that would mean "one unit along the way the camera is looking". If you put it as Vector3(1,0,1), that would mean "one unit along the way the camera is looking, and one unit to the right". So you'll need to experiment with that value to find one that makes the compass display where you actually want it to be on the screen.
I have a pane with one cube on it with a spawner which will spawn cubes out when the game is played. The pane can be rotated and the cubes should stick to it and move forward.
The part i am stuck on is making the cubes that come from the spawner to stick.
I managed to make the original cube stick using
Object1.transform.parent = Object2.transform;
I also managed to make the spawner stick to the pane using the same method.
However when i use this the first cube will stick fine and the cubes from the spawner are not showing up. From what i have researched it could be a scaling issue. Also the spawned cubes do appear under the cube as "Cube(clone)" but their scale is diffrent to the original cube. I have also noticed the scale of the original Cube changes when i press play. It goes from - (10,10,10) to float numbers.
A solution i tried was to set the scale but when i done this the objects did not stick on to the pane at all.
However they did spawn normally.Using this method.
void Update () {
Vector3 scale = new Vector3(10, 10, 10);
Object1.transform.localScale = scale;
Object1.transform.parent = Object2.transform;
}
If anyone has any ideas it will be much appreciated.
In situations like this, it's quite often best to parent an object first, then deal with the local transformations. Local transformations such as transform.localPosition, transform.localRotation and transform.localScale deal with the object's local values in relation to the parent.
There's a paragraph at the end of this page that describes it well:
Note that the parent transform's world rotation and scale are applied
to the local position when calculating the world position. This means
that while 1 unit in Transform.position is always 1 unit, 1 unit in
Transform.localPosition will get scaled by the scale of all ancestors.
I'm currently working on an object that involves bubble-like movement. This object has a rigidbody and a sphere collider.
I use the AddForce method every 1-3 seconds to make it move continuously and slowly.
Now I'd like to know how to make the rigidbody move in the opposite direction (a.k.a bounce off) when they reach the screen edge already. I have already computed the screen edges using ViewportToWorldPoint method.
One ineffective solution that I thought of is to put empty game objects with collider at the edges but that won't work in my case since I'm building for mobile devices which have different screen resolutions/sizes.
Anyone know a good solution for this?
I'm not sure i got the idea. But i think i had the same problem when i was writing an old mobile game.
I had the same idea you did, use empty game objects with box collider on the edges, but then i thought, this isn't responsive, so i wrote this code:
public class Walls_c : MonoBehaviour {
public Transform righttop;
public Transform rightbottom;
public Transform lefttop;
public Transform leftbottom;
// Use this for initialization
void Start () {
righttop.transform.position = Camera.main.ViewportToWorldPoint(new Vector3(1,1,0));
rightbottom.transform.position = Camera.main.ViewportToWorldPoint(new Vector3(1,0,0));
lefttop.transform.position = Camera.main.ViewportToWorldPoint(new Vector3(0,1,0));
leftbottom.transform.position = Camera.main.ViewportToWorldPoint(new Vector3(0,0,0));
}
}
With this, i always get the corners of the screen. It's no fancy... but it works.
Let me now if it works.
In order to get a reflection effect, you need Material. Attach a bouncy material to the edges(gameObject) and let the physics calculate what should be the reaction of collision.
Create a Physics 2D material and set the bounceness to some appropriate value say 0.2.
Regarding your issue:
One ineffective solution that I thought of is to put empty game
objects with collider at the edges but that won't work in my case
since I'm building for mobile devices which have different screen
resolutions/sizes.
If you are working with UI component then dealing with boundaries should not be a problem (since it anchors with different resolution) but if it is not the case you can create a script CameraResizer and an enum Anchor (Left, Right, Top, Bottom) and using the same way ViewportToWorldPoint you can align your empty gameObject (boundary) to any screen size by attaching it the gameObject.
Hope it helps!
I'm working to let a character push objects around. The problem is that as soon as he touches an object he starts moving it, even when the touch was accidental and the character isn't facing the direction of the object.
What I want to do is get the direction the object when a collision happens, and if the camara is really facing that direction allow the player to move it.
Right now I only managed to get the direction of the object, but I don't know how to compare that with the direction of the camera.
This is what I'm trying now:
void OnCollisionEnter(Collision col) {
float maxOffset = 1f;
if (col.gameObject.name == "Sol") {
// Calculate object direction
Vector3 direction = (col.transform.position - transform.position).normalized;
// Check the offset with the camera rotation (this doesn't work)
Vector3 offset = direccion - Camera.main.transform.rotation.eulerAngles.normalized;
if(offset.x + offset.y + offset.z < maxOffset) {
// Move the object
}
}
You can try to achieve this in several different ways. And it is a bit dependent on how precise you mean facing the box.
You can get events when an object is visible within a certain camera, and when it enters or leaves using the following functions. With these commands from the moment the box gets rendered with that camera (so even if just a edge is visible) your collision will trigger.
OnWillRenderObject, Renderer.isVisible Renderer.OnBecameVisible, OnBecameInvisible
Or you could attempt to calculate whether and objects bounding box falls within the camera's view frustum, there for you could use the following geometry commands
GeometryUtility.CalculateFrustumPlanes, GeometryUtility.TestPlanesAABB
Or if you rather have a very precise facing you could also go for a Physics.Raycast So then you will only trigger the event when the ray is hitting the object.
Hope this helps ya out.
Take a compass obj and align it to ur device sorry object than when you move it you can always know where it points to.
theoretically it should work but maybe your object just moves around because of a bug in your simulator motion engine.
I'm developing a game that you drag and drop objects into boxes and I have no idea what's the best and most efficient way to detect whether my objects are in a box.
I'm well aware of colliders and I'm using BoxColliders and triggers to find out whether my object is touching a box but I want to detect the moment when my object (which we can assume to be sphere for sake of simplicity but later will be a mesh) is completely inside my box trigger/collider.
I read about "Contains" method of colliders but IIRC they just check if one single point inside that collider but I'm interested to know if the whole object is inside the collider.
Thanks in advance folks.
Short answer: If you want 100% accuracy, your algorithm will never be better than O(|V|) (worst case) where V = {all vertices in mesh}, meaning you'd run .Collides() over every vertex and break if you find one that is outside your container.
Longer answer: Several methods exist to subdivide mesh surfaces, examples include: KD-Trees, OcTrees. These are beyond the scope of an SO answer to provide a full implementation, I suggest you see the wiki pages for details.
You could use these methods to divide your mesh up in to smaller sets of vertices. To speed up your algorithm you would start at the root of your subdivision tree and test if that node is contained in your container box. Keep working through the tree until you find a node that is not contained by your box. This will allow your "contains" test to fail faster but ultimately you'll wind up testing every vertex if your box contains your mesh.
Caveat: This solution does not work if your mesh is animated. In that case your best bet is to use the bounds around things like arms, feet, legs, etc and use that information to cull your Contains() tests. Again, you'll end up having to test every vertex if the mesh is fully inside your box.
All boxes have a boxCollider. If an object touches the second box, the object must be inside the first box.
This is not a good solution but, maybe it will be usefull.
Use Renderer.bounds property to get bounding box of your object.
Depending on what object you have and how accurate you want to check it to be inside a collider you might than use one of the simple ways to determine that.
for a more refined and cleaner approach. this would be perfect for what you are doing .
you can check the distance between the object you are dragging and the box .
the box has a x,y,z value which represents its position in space.
so when you drag your gameobject it may be just 0.2 on the x,y, or z away from the centere of your box. so just use this method to calculate the distance between your dragged object and the box.
var other :Transform;
function Update()
{
var dist = Vector3.Distance(other.position, transform.position);
// while dragging
if(dist <10)// 10 being on all 3 axiz .
{
//dragged object.position = box position
}
if (dist == 0)
{
print("i am in the centre of the box");
}
}
thus your gameobject will be in the box .
The box within a box solution above is a good option, but if that won't work (due to variably sized/shaped objects) you might be able to accomplish something with Physics.Raycast or Collider.Raycast. I had a similar problem where I needed to test if arbitrary points were contained inside colliders (many of which were unusual blobby concave objects).
The basic idea is a "bed of nails" approach where I cast rays toward the point from multiple directions. If I hit the outside collider on all of the rays, then I can be pretty confident that the point is contained inside the collider (but still not completely certain). Here's a pic:
In this picture, we're trying to see if the blue point is inside the yellow collider. The GREEN arrows represent successful raycasts (the yellow collider is hit), and the PINK one is unsuccessful (the yellow collider is NOT hit).
Here is a code snippet illustrating this:
public static class CollisionUtils {
private static readonly Vector3[] raycastDirections;
// These are the directions that we shoot rays from to check the collider.
static UltrasoundCollisionUtils() {
raycastDirections = new Vector3[5];
raycastDirections[0] = new Vector3(0,1,0);
raycastDirections[1] = new Vector3(0,-1,-0);
raycastDirections[2] = new Vector3(0,0,1);
raycastDirections[3] = new Vector3(-1.41f, 0, -0.5f);
raycastDirections[4] = new Vector3(1.41f, 0, -0.5f);
}
public static bool IsContained (Vector3 targetPoint, Collider collider) {
// A quick check - if the bounds doesn't contain targetPoint, then it definitely can't be contained in the collider
if (!collider.bounds.Contains(targetPoint)) {
return false;
}
// The "100f * direction" is a magic number so that we
// start far enough from the point.
foreach (Vector3 direction in raycastDirections) {
Ray ray = new Ray(targetPoint - 100f * direction, direction);
RaycastHit dummyHit = new RaycastHit();
// dummyHit because collider.Raycast requires a RaycastHit
if (!collider.Raycast(ray, out dummyHit, 100f)) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
}
One way you could adapt this algorithm is rather than use Collider.Raycast, do a Physics.Raycast. If the rays hit anything other than your collider, then you know that your target object isn't entirely in the collider.
Add a BoxCollider which surrounds the whole of the object you are testing for and check its bounds min and max are contained within the BoxCollider its entering ... this may not suit for complex mesh objects but you may be able to get away with it and its cheap
Simply,
You can place a box Collider at the bottom of your container.. If your sphere or whatever object touches that then it is completely inside the container..
There is one method though....not that accurate but will work :
Make four empties with collider(Circle / Box) like four wheels of a car and make the object parent to these empty objects with collider.
Then assign every collider a bool whether it is touched or not....
Count the number of colliders touched along with the actual mesh collider...Roughly estimates the orientation of the overlap. If it is 2 that means touched or overlaped from sideways.
Ex: If two collider + the mesh collider is colliding which means it is overlapped sideways...
I solved it using bounds.contains(vector 3 point).
I placed a single point on the object to be detected, and once it was inside the checking limits, I was able to acknowledge its presence.
public class PointInsideBound : MonoBehaviour
{
public Collider BoundCollider;
private Transform pointToCheck;
private void OnTriggerEnter(Collider other)
{
if (pointToCheck == null)
{
//There is a point on top of the collided object. Getting the reference here.
pointToCheck = other.transform.GetChild(0);
}
}
private void OnTriggerStay(Collider other)
{
if (pointToCheck == null)
{
return;
}
if (BoundCollider.bounds.Contains(pointToCheck.position))
{
Debug.Log(" Point Inside the boxcollider");
BoundCollider.enabled = false;
}
}
}
You should use a collider. This is description. http://docs.unity3d.com/Documentation/ScriptReference/Collider.html